Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

The Paradox of Power in CSR: A Case Study on Implementation

By Krista Bondy

Abstract

Purpose Although current literature assumes positive outcomes for stakeholders resulting from an increase in power associated with CSR, this research suggests that this increase can lead to conflict within organizations, resulting in almost complete inactivity on CSR. Methods A single in-depth case study, focusing on power as an embedded concept. Results Empirical evidence is used to demonstrate how some actors use CSR to improve their own positions within an organization. Resource dependence theory is used to highlight why this may be a more significant concern for CSR. Conclusions Increasing power for CSR has the potential to offer actors associated with it increased personal power, and thus can attract opportunistic actors with little interest in realizing the benefits of CSR for the company and its stakeholders. Thus power can be an impediment to furthering CSR strategy and activities at the individual and organizational level

Topics: Corporate social responsibility, Implementation, Power, Resource dependence theory, Case study, Empirical
Publisher: Springer Netherlands
Year: 2008
DOI identifier: 10.1007/s10551-008-9889-7
OAI identifier: oai:dspace.lib.cranfield.ac.uk:1826/4318
Provided by: Cranfield CERES
Journal:

Suggested articles

Citations

  1. 1978/2003, The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective doi
  2. (2004). A Phase-Wise Development Approach to Business Excellence: Towards an Innovative, Stakeholder-Oriented Assessment Tool for Organizational Excellence and CSR’, doi
  3. (1991). A Social Psychology of Organizing (Wheatsheaf, doi
  4. (1998). A Strategic Choice-Resource Dependence Analysis of Union Mergers in the British and Australian Broadcasting and Film Industries’, doi
  5. (2007). A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis of the Strategic Value of Beyond Compliance Occupational Health and Safety Programs’,
  6. (2001). All for One and One for All? The Development and Transfer of Power Across Organizational Levels’, doi
  7. (1994). An Analysis of Board of Director Size and Composition in Bankrupt Organizations’, doi
  8. (2005). An Empirical Investigation into the Power Behind Empowerment’, doi
  9. (1994). Analysis and Interpretation of Qualitative Data in Consumer Research’, doi
  10. and W.Joyce: 1985, ‘Organizational Adaptation: Strategic Choice and Environmental Determinism’, doi
  11. (1998). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory (Sage, doi
  12. (2005). Beyond the Mainstream: Foucault, Power and Organization Theory’,
  13. (1989). Building Theories from Case Study Research’, doi
  14. (1997). Cannibals with Forks: The Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business (Capstone, doi
  15. (1985). Case Research in Marketing: Opportunities, Problems, and a Process’, doi
  16. (2005). Citizenship, Accountability and Community: doi
  17. (2004). Codes of Good Governance Worldwide: What is the Trigger?’, doi
  18. (1992). Consequences of Influence Tactics Used with Subordinates, Peers and the Boss’, doi
  19. (2005). Contextualizing Influence Activities: An Objective Hermeneutical Approach’, doi
  20. (1994). Corporate Governance and the Bankrupt Firm: An Empirical Assessment’, doi
  21. (2000). Corporate Greening as Amoralization’, doi
  22. (1990). Corporate Linkages and Organizational Environment: doi
  23. (2002). Corporate Social Responsibility in Europe and the U.S.: Insights from Businesses’ Self-Presentations’, doi
  24. (2004). Corporate Social Responsibility Theories: Mapping the Territory’, doi
  25. (2006). Corporate Social Responsibility: An Implementation Guide for Canadian Business’, Government of Canada, Ottawa. http:// strategis.ic.gc.ca/epic/internet/incsr-rse.nsf/vwapj/ CSR_mar2006.pdf/$FILE/CSR_mar2006.pdf.
  26. (2006). Corporate Social Responsibility: The 3C-SR Model’, doi
  27. (2006). Corporate Social Responsibility: Three Key Approaches’, doi
  28. (1967). Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research (Aldine Transaction, doi
  29. (1997). Diversified Mentoring Relationships in Organizations: A Power Perspective’, doi
  30. (2002). Embedded Case Study Methods: Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Knowledge (Sage, doi
  31. (2000). Ethnography and Grounded Theory: A Happy Marriage?’,
  32. (1996). Ethnography: Theoretical Background’,
  33. (2005). Experiences with Structuring Corporate Social Responsibility in Dutch Industry’, doi
  34. (2001). Globalization, Athletic Footwear Commodity Chains and Employment Relations in China’, doi
  35. (2003). How Should Civil Society (and the Government) Respond to ‘Corporate Social Responsibility’? A Critique of Business Motivations and the Potential for Partnerships’, doi
  36. (2004). Implementation Deficits of Ethical Trade Systems’, doi
  37. (2004). Implementing Codes of Conduct: How Businesses Manage Social Performance in Global Supply Chains doi
  38. (2004). Implementing the Ethos of Corporate Codes of Ethics: Australia, Canada and Sweden’, Business Ethics: A European Review doi
  39. (1991). Importance of Different Power Sources in Downward and Lateral Relations’, doi
  40. (1980). Intraorganizational Influence Tactics: Explorations in Getting One’s Way’ doi
  41. (1994). Participant Observation: A Model for Organizational Investigation?’, doi
  42. Piskorski: 2005, ‘Power Imbalance, Mutual Dependence, and Constraint Absorption: A Closer Look at Resource Dependence’,
  43. (1974). Power a Radical doi
  44. (2001). Power and Knowledge’, doi
  45. (2005). Power Dynamics in Negotiation’, doi
  46. (2005). Power to All Our Friends? Living with Imbalance in Supplier–Retailer Relationships’, doi
  47. (1977). Power, Dependence, and Effective Management’,
  48. (2007). Putting the S Back in Corporate Social Responsibility: A Multilevel Theory of Social Change in Organizations’, doi
  49. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Source Book, 2nd Edition (Sage, doi
  50. (2002). Qualitative Interviewing: Asking, Listening and Interpreting’, doi
  51. (2001). Selecting a Research Methodology’, doi
  52. (1979). Sociological Paradigms and Organisational Analysis (Gower Publishing,
  53. (1999). Stakeholder Influence Strategies’, doi
  54. (2002). Standards for Corporate Conduct in the International Arena: Challenges and Opportunities for Multinational Corporations’, doi
  55. (2003). Strategic Organizational Change: Exploring the Roles of Environmental Structure, Internal Conscious Awareness and Knowledge’, doi
  56. (1991). Strategic Responses to Institutional Processes’, doi
  57. (1977). Strategy Formation as a Political Process’,
  58. (1988). Tales of the Field: On Writing Ethnography doi
  59. (1959). The Basis of Social Power’,
  60. (1973). The Case for and Against Business Assumption of Social Responsibilities’, doi
  61. (2005). The EFQM Excellence Model. European Foundation for Quality Management’, www.efqm.org/ doi
  62. (1988). The Hierarchical Abuse of Power in Organizations’,
  63. (2004). The Influence of Culture on Stakeholder Management: Social Policy Implementation in doi
  64. (2004). The Methods Used to Implement an Ethical Code of Conduct and Employee Attitudes’, doi
  65. (1973). The Politics of Organizational Decision- doi
  66. (1998). The Power Behind Empowerment: Implications for Research and Practice’, doi
  67. (2005). The Psychology of Behaviour at Work: doi
  68. (1995). The Relationship Between Supervisory Power and Organizational Characteristics’, doi
  69. (2000). The Resource Dependence Role of Corporate Directors: Strategic Adaptation of Board Composition in Response to Environmental Change’, doi
  70. (1947). The Theory of Social and Economic Organization
  71. (1993). The Training and Development Function: Its Search for Power and Influence in Organizations’, doi
  72. (2000). Three Epistemological Stances for Qualitative Inquiry: Interpretivism, Hermeneutics, and Social Constructionism’,
  73. (1997). Unexercised Channel Power Related to the Costs of Using Different Types of Power Sources’,
  74. (1977). Who Gets Power – And How They Hold on to It: A Strategic-Contingency Model of Power’, doi

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.